Is my buddy going to jail???

Is my buddy going to jail???

Author
Discussion

ModernAndy

2,094 posts

134 months

Wednesday 24th December 2014
quotequote all
Shuvi McTupya said:
It seems they won't have to prove anything , she will be putting in a guilty plea..
Again, fair enough. I wasn't really speaking just about the specific case on this thread. I was trying to provide an explanation as to why the police would have the power to speak to somebody or take somebody in for questioning if they had been spotted doing some dodgy driving and drink driving is suspected.

I wish your friend all the best and hope she doesn't make a similar mistake in future. If she is an alcoholic, I do hope she is able to recover.

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Wednesday 24th December 2014
quotequote all
bulldong said:
I have no idea what she has to gain. The problem is there are no winners in this situation. I think that if the person knew she was pissed when she left then she should have said something at the time or offered to drive her home.
i don;t know if you are a troll or just incredibly naive ...

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Wednesday 24th December 2014
quotequote all
Shuvi McTupya said:
Martin,

I have always been a drinker myself so her drinking does not concern me. She doesn't drink every single day but I certainly wouldn't raise an eye lid if she had a couple of glasses of wine on a 'school night '. She doesn't need to finish a bottle just because it had been opened or anything like that! I may have seen her polish of a bottle in an evening but that is not normal behaviour by any means.

Oh, the son in question is 22, she also has a 19yr old.
pertinent moment to post AUDIT i think

http://www.alcohollearningcentre.org.uk/Topics/Bro...

http://www.talkingalcohol.com/files/pdfs/WHO_audit...

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 24th December 2014
quotequote all
Landshark said:
I was pretty sure that it was taken out from S4 RTA? s4(7)
Looks like you're correct. I assume they were tidied up and all put in PACE rather than the specific statutes.



Landshark

2,117 posts

180 months

Wednesday 24th December 2014
quotequote all
La Liga said:
Landshark said:
I was pretty sure that it was taken out from S4 RTA? s4(7)
Looks like you're correct. I assume they were tidied up and all put in PACE rather than the specific statutes.
Would be nice, but when has the law been tidy?? It's generally all over the place!!! winkbeer

wack

2,103 posts

205 months

Thursday 25th December 2014
quotequote all
Greendubber said:
Although a lot get caught on the drive asleep in the drivers seat as they cant make it out of the car!
I knew somebody that drove home drunk , parked up, decided he wanted some chips, got back in the car then got stopped on the way back from the chip shop

Second offence, well over the limit by 3-4x

He was bricking it when he went to court 10k fine 2 years in prison, came out bouncing with a 3 year ban and a £500 fine

What's the point in deterent sentences being available if they're never used, the fine was about 3 days wages to him.

She won't go to prison


Edited by wack on Thursday 25th December 07:57

Shuvi McTupya

Original Poster:

24,460 posts

246 months

Thursday 29th January 2015
quotequote all
She had her hearing today. 18 month ban and £750 fine, could have been worse!

Unfortunately she has been let go from her job in the last few weeks though due to the down turn in the oil and gas industry so now she has no driving license and a criminal record to declare while looking for her next job..




Silent1

19,761 posts

234 months

Thursday 29th January 2015
quotequote all
Shuvi McTupya said:
She had her hearing today. 18 month ban and £750 fine, could have been worse!

Unfortunately she has been let go from her job in the last few weeks though due to the down turn in the oil and gas industry so now she has no driving license and a criminal record to declare while looking for her next job..
She only has to declare if they ask, most places don't.

Shuvi McTupya

Original Poster:

24,460 posts

246 months

Thursday 29th January 2015
quotequote all
I thought it was normal for employers to ask if you had a criminal record, i am sure it used to be!


Silent1

19,761 posts

234 months

Thursday 29th January 2015
quotequote all
It's not too common in my experience, it seems also that she only has to declare whilst she's banned if I've read this right:
http://www.nacro.org.uk/data/files/nacro-200702130...

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Thursday 29th January 2015
quotequote all
Silent1 said:
Shuvi McTupya said:
She had her hearing today. 18 month ban and £750 fine, could have been worse!

Unfortunately she has been let go from her job in the last few weeks though due to the down turn in the oil and gas industry so now she has no driving license and a criminal record to declare while looking for her next job..
She only has to declare if they ask, most places don't.
most places ask in line with the rehabilitation of offenders act as that is all they can ask, other workplaces where there is regular contact with Vulnerable Adults, Children or people in vulnerable situations ( or the management of those functions) there is an exemption fro the rehab of offenders legislation and they can ask for full criminal history 9 normally these are jobs where enhanced CRB /DBS is carried out as well ) then of course there are the background checks required forthe police or military and for other national security sensitive roles.

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Thursday 29th January 2015
quotequote all
Silent1 said:
It's not too common in my experience, it seems also that she only has to declare whilst she's banned if I've read this right:
http://www.nacro.org.uk/data/files/nacro-200702130...
The fine means the offence has a rehabilitation period of 5 years. It's the penalty with the longest period that counts.

Chrisgr31

13,440 posts

254 months

Thursday 29th January 2015
quotequote all
Shuvi McTupya said:
I thought it was normal for employers to ask if you had a criminal record, i am sure it used to be!
Well even if they ask you just tell them. Whilst I dont want to say its "only" drink driving it isn't murder, fraud etc.

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Friday 30th January 2015
quotequote all
Cooperman said:
If someone has a grudge against another person, just think of the mayhem they could cause.
Wait until the person gets home one evening and their engine is still warm, then call the Police from a call box giving a false (to you) name and address and say that 'so and so' has just driven home erratically and intoxicated. Leave the rest to the Police who will force entry, take a probably-negative sample of breath, then apologise (maybe) and leave.
Next week borrow or hire a car similar to theirs, fit some false plates and drive through a speed camera at well over and the person will get an S172.
Can all that actually happen and if so, how could it be prevented?
It can't. I've pointed out in other threads that an innocent person can be framed via a 172. Be ironic if a really pissed of motorist did that to the magistrate who recently fined him, wouldn't it. Folow him home one day, belt through a speed camera he's just passed 30 seconds ago at mach 1, and he's buggered.

allergictocheese

1,290 posts

112 months

Friday 30th January 2015
quotequote all
Dr Jekyll said:
The fine means the offence has a rehabilitation period of 5 years. It's the penalty with the longest period that counts.
This has since changed, in that a fine has a rehabilitation period of 12 months (see s139 Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 'LASPO'). An endorsement, however, still maintains a 5 year period, hence you would still have to declare it to insurers and potential employers who ask about it for 5 years.

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Friday 30th January 2015
quotequote all
mph1977 said:
pertinent moment to post AUDIT i think

http://www.alcohollearningcentre.org.uk/Topics/Bro...
Apparently i'm a higher risk drinker!

I drink 2-3 times a week, typically have 3-4 units when I drink and once a month may have 8 units or more! So 3-4 pints.

I imagine i'm on the brink of becomming a fully blown alcoholic.

Thankfully I only scored 2 on the next lot of questions and that's only because my mother in law once expressed concern over my drinking because I had 4 sherrys on Christmas day...


Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Friday 30th January 2015
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Cooperman said:
If someone has a grudge against another person, just think of the mayhem they could cause.
Wait until the person gets home one evening and their engine is still warm, then call the Police from a call box giving a false (to you) name and address and say that 'so and so' has just driven home erratically and intoxicated. Leave the rest to the Police who will force entry, take a probably-negative sample of breath, then apologise (maybe) and leave.
Next week borrow or hire a car similar to theirs, fit some false plates and drive through a speed camera at well over and the person will get an S172.
Can all that actually happen and if so, how could it be prevented?
It can't. I've pointed out in other threads that an innocent person can be framed via a 172. Be ironic if a really pissed of motorist did that to the magistrate who recently fined him, wouldn't it. Folow him home one day, belt through a speed camera he's just passed 30 seconds ago at mach 1, and he's buggered.
And how many cases of this has there actually been?

If someone is intent on framing you there are a lot more serious things they can do other than simply getting you a speeding ticket.

Also, hiring a car similar to yours and putting false plates on it? How much effort and cost are they really going to go to for the sake of getting you into trouble for speeding? How much is it going to cost them? That's before you even consider that you may not drive a car that they can easily hire. You couldn't do that to me because I drive a 12 year old car. They're also screwed if the picture shows them driving as well. It's not like you're simply going to accept a ticket for doing mach 1 when you will be fairly certain that you weren't doing that speed. If I get a ticket for going 5 mph faster than i was i'd probably just accept it. Twice as fast as I was and I'd want to see the evidence as i'd know I hadn't been going that fast.

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Saturday 31st January 2015
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
robinessex said:
Cooperman said:
If someone has a grudge against another person, just think of the mayhem they could cause.
Wait until the person gets home one evening and their engine is still warm, then call the Police from a call box giving a false (to you) name and address and say that 'so and so' has just driven home erratically and intoxicated. Leave the rest to the Police who will force entry, take a probably-negative sample of breath, then apologise (maybe) and leave.
Next week borrow or hire a car similar to theirs, fit some false plates and drive through a speed camera at well over and the person will get an S172.
Can all that actually happen and if so, how could it be prevented?
It can't. I've pointed out in other threads that an innocent person can be framed via a 172. Be ironic if a really pissed of motorist did that to the magistrate who recently fined him, wouldn't it. Folow him home one day, belt through a speed camera he's just passed 30 seconds ago at mach 1, and he's buggered.
And how many cases of this has there actually been?

If someone is intent on framing you there are a lot more serious things they can do other than simply getting you a speeding ticket.

Also, hiring a car similar to yours and putting false plates on it? How much effort and cost are they really going to go to for the sake of getting you into trouble for speeding? How much is it going to cost them? That's before you even consider that you may not drive a car that they can easily hire. You couldn't do that to me because I drive a 12 year old car. They're also screwed if the picture shows them driving as well. It's not like you're simply going to accept a ticket for doing mach 1 when you will be fairly certain that you weren't doing that speed. If I get a ticket for going 5 mph faster than i was i'd probably just accept it. Twice as fast as I was and I'd want to see the evidence as i'd know I hadn't been going that fast.
U TOTALLY missed the point. Just because it would be a pain in the arse, doesn't negate from the fact that IF SOMEONE BOTHERED TO DO IT, YOU WOULD BE BUGGERED. The police would have a photo of 'your car', going through a speed camera AT THE TIME YOU ACTUALLY WENT THROUGH IT, at over the speed limit, and AND YOU CAN'T PROOVE YOU WEREN'T THE DRIVER, can you ? And don't forget that stalkers, who mostly are plain nutty, have done the barmiest of things, including murder. How about a convicted stalker who has a grudge against someone ( a celebrity ?) who has taken them to court, and he's been convicted.

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Saturday 31st January 2015
quotequote all
robinessex said:
U TOTALLY missed the point. Just because it would be a pain in the arse, doesn't negate from the fact that IF SOMEONE BOTHERED TO DO IT, YOU WOULD BE BUGGERED. The police would have a photo of 'your car', going through a speed camera AT THE TIME YOU ACTUALLY WENT THROUGH IT, at over the speed limit, and AND YOU CAN'T PROOVE YOU WEREN'T THE DRIVER, can you ? And don't forget that stalkers, who mostly are plain nutty, have done the barmiest of things, including murder. How about a convicted stalker who has a grudge against someone ( a celebrity ?) who has taken them to court, and he's been convicted.
No you missed my point. You've created a hypothetical situation that is ludicrous. If anyone could be bothered to do it, which is incredibly doubtful, they'd stand a good chance of being caught out when the photo identified them or the car was subtly different etc.
I'm sure stalkers can think of much easier ways to harras celebrities than getting points and a fine...



longblackcoat

5,047 posts

182 months

Saturday 31st January 2015
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Devil2575 said:
robinessex said:
Cooperman said:
If someone has a grudge against another person, just think of the mayhem they could cause.
Wait until the person gets home one evening and their engine is still warm, then call the Police from a call box giving a false (to you) name and address and say that 'so and so' has just driven home erratically and intoxicated. Leave the rest to the Police who will force entry, take a probably-negative sample of breath, then apologise (maybe) and leave.
Next week borrow or hire a car similar to theirs, fit some false plates and drive through a speed camera at well over and the person will get an S172.
Can all that actually happen and if so, how could it be prevented?
It can't. I've pointed out in other threads that an innocent person can be framed via a 172. Be ironic if a really pissed of motorist did that to the magistrate who recently fined him, wouldn't it. Folow him home one day, belt through a speed camera he's just passed 30 seconds ago at mach 1, and he's buggered.
And how many cases of this has there actually been?

If someone is intent on framing you there are a lot more serious things they can do other than simply getting you a speeding ticket.

Also, hiring a car similar to yours and putting false plates on it? How much effort and cost are they really going to go to for the sake of getting you into trouble for speeding? How much is it going to cost them? That's before you even consider that you may not drive a car that they can easily hire. You couldn't do that to me because I drive a 12 year old car. They're also screwed if the picture shows them driving as well. It's not like you're simply going to accept a ticket for doing mach 1 when you will be fairly certain that you weren't doing that speed. If I get a ticket for going 5 mph faster than i was i'd probably just accept it. Twice as fast as I was and I'd want to see the evidence as i'd know I hadn't been going that fast.
U TOTALLY missed the point. Just because it would be a pain in the arse, doesn't negate from the fact that IF SOMEONE BOTHERED TO DO IT, YOU WOULD BE BUGGERED. The police would have a photo of 'your car', going through a speed camera AT THE TIME YOU ACTUALLY WENT THROUGH IT, at over the speed limit, and AND YOU CAN'T PROOVE YOU WEREN'T THE DRIVER, can you ? And don't forget that stalkers, who mostly are plain nutty, have done the barmiest of things, including murder. How about a convicted stalker who has a grudge against someone ( a celebrity ?) who has taken them to court, and he's been convicted.
As is so often the case on PH, there's much wailing and gnashing of teeth based on the false supposition that "they" are going to get you.

Personal experience backs this up. A letter came through stating that my wife's car had been speeding, please provide details etc. As she was in Milton Keynes and the offence happened about ten miles away it was possible that it was her, but she was convinced she'd not been on that road. We wrote and asked for a photo as we were convinced they were wrong. The provided photo showed an almost identical car with an identical plate. Slightly different details though (rear bumper).

We wrote back, pointing out that it was a different car, and that in any case my wife was in the office at that time, and about two months later got a letter stating that they were satisfied that my wife wasn't involved and that there would be no action of any sort.

To make it work you would need to have an absolutely identical car, drive on a route the driver normally took, and ensure that the person had no way of proving where they were. Bear in mind you can use phone records to show your movements if you're really prepared to do so, making it pretty difficult for the perpetrator in this case to carry out their crime. But carry on believing it if you want to, despite the astronomical implausibility of it all.